[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wavoman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well you have to make a bunch of assumptions about the magnitute of the difference and the chance that a random person hearing it actually detects it, but I ran lots of values and, very roughly, to have 80% power, i.e., 80% chance of detecting the difference with 95% certainty that it really IS a difference, you need about 15 subjects. Allocating 30 minutes to each test, we can do this in one full one day at a meet, taking 15 volunteers who feel they have "golden ears". I would love to take a top-of-the-line digital system, and play the same passage using MP3's of various bit rates, then full redbook 16/44.1, then 24/192 LPCM. This mimics a test the pros did and published. They claimed no one could hear the difference between redbook and hi-res LPCM. I bet we can. Would love to know.

I'll bet we can, too!

Without testing there is no Scientific Method.

Welcome Wavoman.

USG

 

[acidbasement]

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just a thought... While you are absolutely right that there are plenty of tests and studies out there, conducting some of them ourselves, like Wavoman wants to do, moves the prevailing views of our fact based forum into the Verifiable and Reproducible arena. Really glad to have you aboard. USG

Yes indeedy.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif While you are absolutely right that there are plenty of tests and studies out there, conducting some of them ourselves, like Wavoman wants to do, moves the prevailing views of our fact based forum into the Verifiable and Reproducible arena.

If a person won't accept the results of a peer reviewed report, they certainly won't accept the word of an anonymous poster on an internet chat board. This isn't the place for doing serious research. It's the place to come and chat about the subject of home audio. Those with experience in particular areas of the hobby share their knowledge with folks who don't have that experience yet. We offer advice and links off to further reading if someone wants to get deeper into the subject. If someone disagrees with us, we keep our cool and argue on point. We don't resort to name calling.

In my opinion, there is absolutely no need for a new forum to separate people discussing the same subject. But if the person making the decision feels it's necessary, the two forums should be clearly described without bias and on an equal position in the heirarchy. So far, the way it's being described, I won't have much reason to participate in the objectivist subforum. I'm really not interested in discussing the validity of scientific testing methods. I'm only interested in the effect, or lack of effect, cables have on sound quality.

See ya
Steve

 

[883dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif If a person won't accept the results of a peer reviewed report, they certainly won't accept the word of an anonymous poster on an internet chat board. This isn't the place for doing serious research. It's the place to come and chat about the subject of home audio. Those with experience in particular areas of the hobby share their knowledge with folks who don't have that experience yet. We offer advice and links off to further reading if someone wants to get deeper into the subject. If someone disagrees with us, we keep our cool and argue on point. We don't resort to name calling. In my opinion, there is absolutely no need for a new forum to separate people discussing the same subject. But if the person making the decision feels it's necessary, the two forums should be clearly described without bias and on an equal position in the heirarchy. So far, the way it's being described, I won't have much reason to participate in the objectivist subforum. I'm really not interested in discussing the validity of scientific testing methods. I'm only interested in the effect, or lack of effect, cables have on sound quality. See ya Steve

I'm only interested in the effect, or lack of effect, cables have on sound quality.

This quote shows why we need another forum.

 

[bigshot]

What does the quote you selected have to do with needing another forum?

Some people love Sennheiser cans and don't like Grados. Some people feel strongly the opposite way. Do we need two separate forums for them too?

Disagreeing with another person's opinion is a part of life. Because I offer arguments against your opinion, it doesn't mean that I'm disrespecting you. The problem starts when people wrap their egos around their opinion- a simple discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of an argument leads to personal attacks. That's wrong. No one ever learned anything that way.

If someone truly believes that they're right, they should gather up their supporting evidence and respectfully defend their point to prove their case. It's not about winning or losing. It's about exchanging information. Trying to silence opposition by removing any form of disagreement is for cowards.

See ya
Steve

 

[digger945]

So is this thread about moving beyond opinion to establish some method of testing?
Not for the sake of proving one right or wrong, but like you say, exchanging information.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Not worth it.

 

[diogenes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wavoman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well you have to make a bunch of assumptions about the magnitute of the difference and the chance that a random person hearing it actually detects it, but I ran lots of values and, very roughly, to have 80% power, i.e., 80% chance of detecting the difference with 95% certainty that it really IS a difference, you need about 15 subjects.

And who let the Bayesian in?

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif If a person won't accept the results of a peer reviewed report, they certainly won't accept the word of an anonymous poster on an internet chat board. This isn't the place for doing serious research. It's the place to come and chat about the subject of home audio. Those with experience in particular areas of the hobby share their knowledge with folks who don't have that experience yet. We offer advice and links off to further reading if someone wants to get deeper into the subject. If someone disagrees with us, we keep our cool and argue on point. We don't resort to name calling. In my opinion, there is absolutely no need for a new forum to separate people discussing the same subject. But if the person making the decision feels it's necessary, the two forums should be clearly described without bias and on an equal position in the heirarchy. So far, the way it's being described, I won't have much reason to participate in the objectivist subforum. I'm really not interested in discussing the validity of scientific testing methods. I'm only interested in the effect, or lack of effect, cables have on sound quality. See ya Steve

Steve

I don't have a clue how to get us integrated into the general forums, but I'd be interested in hearing how it might be done....

On the other hand, our proposed forum is gone from the forum list, and what was once called "objectivism" might be a non issue very shortly.

Just as you are interested in cables and Wavoman in testing, we are all part of the same group. I don't think Waveoman is as interested in "discussing" the validity of scientific testing methods as he is in the results of these tests. And I think we are all have some curiosity what these results may be and how they relate to the various folk remedies that are currently in vogue.

Eric

 

[wavoman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by diogenes /img/forum/go_quote.gif And who let the Bayesian in?

Ah, you living in Banach space, searching for honesty, you smoked me out. I studied with the original, Leonard Jimme Savage, first modern Bayesian. Yea, I'm that old.

 

[wavoman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger945 /img/forum/go_quote.gif So is this thread about moving beyond opinion to establish some method of testing? Not for the sake of proving one right or wrong, but like you say, exchanging information.

Yes, exactly, you found our voice, IMO.

upstateguy got it too:

moves the prevailing views of our fact based forum into the Verifiable and Reproducible arena.

upstateguy, thanks for the beer.

At the NJ meet I met a lot of students (we need young ears, I can't hear the highs well anymore) who were interested in more serious testing. I think over XMAS break I will do a mini-meet with three of them as listeners and me as tester. First up: Ratshack mini2mini cheapest they sell vs $100+ famous specialty mini2mini (manufacturer's name will not be published). We'll use Cowon i7 with perfectly ripped WAVs and an iQube ... no one can fault those. We can beg and borrow a whole range of cans: Senn 600, beyer 880/600 Ohm, ATH2K, D2000, K701 I know we can get. Three subjects is not enough, but we will learn a lot about the process, the record keeping, etc. Maybe sooner than XMAS if we can pull it off. Single blind.

 

[acidbasement]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif If a person won't accept the results of a peer reviewed report, they certainly won't accept the word of an anonymous poster on an internet chat board. This isn't the place for doing serious research.

Why not, if that's what some of us want to do? We have the equipment and the curiosity, and many of us have the capacity to design rigourous experiments. Whether we replicate something that's already been done or refine previous work, I think it would be fun at the very least, and I disagree with your assertion that nobody would believe the results - maybe not everyone would, but that's fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's the place to come and chat about the subject of home audio. Those with experience in particular areas of the hobby share their knowledge with folks who don't have that experience yet. We offer advice and links off to further reading if someone wants to get deeper into the subject. If someone disagrees with us, we keep our cool and argue on point. We don't resort to name calling. In my opinion, there is absolutely no need for a new forum to separate people discussing the same subject. But if the person making the decision feels it's necessary, the two forums should be clearly described without bias and on an equal position in the heirarchy.

Sounds good to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif So far, the way it's being described, I won't have much reason to participate in the objectivist subforum. I'm really not interested in discussing the validity of scientific testing methods. I'm only interested in the effect, or lack of effect, cables have on sound quality. See ya Steve

To each their own. I see people posting here already who are interested in doing and talking about science, toward the same ends that you profess to desire - acquiring and disseminating knowledge. I really don't know why you are trying to discourage this. Trying to take away our fun?

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wavoman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, exactly, you found our voice, IMO. upstateguy got it too: moves the prevailing views of our fact based forum into the Verifiable and Reproducible arena. upstateguy, thanks for the beer. At the NJ meet I met a lot of students (we need young ears, I can't hear the highs well anymore) who were interested in more serious testing. I think over XMAS break I will do a mini-meet with three of them as listeners and me as tester. First up: Ratshack mini2mini cheapest they sell vs $100+ famous specialty mini2mini (manufacturer's name will not be published). We'll use Cowon i7 with perfectly ripped WAVs and an iQube ... no one can fault those. We can beg and borrow a whole range of cans: Senn 600, beyer 880/600 Ohm, ATH2K, D2000, K701 I know we can get. Three subjects is not enough, but we will learn a lot about the process, the record keeping, etc. Maybe sooner than XMAS if we can pull it off. Single blind.

Sounds like a plan....

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif On the other hand, our proposed forum is gone from the forum list, and what was once called "objectivism" might be a non issue very shortly.

That would be the best result of all. The topic should be "cables", not whether everyone agrees that they make a difference or not. Perhaps the powers that be have figured out that a banishment group isn't a good idea. Anyone with any experience in RMing usenet groups knows that. Banishment groups just end up being spam traps and the problem doesn't go away- it just exists in two groups instead of one.

See ya
Steve

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif That would be the best result of all. The topic should be "cables", not whether everyone agrees that they make a difference or not. Perhaps the powers that be have figured out that a banishment group isn't a good idea. Anyone with any experience in RMing usenet groups knows that. Banishment groups just end up being spam traps and the problem doesn't go away- it just exists in two groups instead of one. See ya Steve

I agree with you.